We talked the other day about some business leaders using heavy-handed election tactics, pressuring their employees to support Mitt Romney, even going so far as to suggest the workers' jobs are on the line. What we didn't know is what the Republican candidate has done to encourage these efforts.
In These Times published this audio clip yesterday, and our pal James Carter isolated the relevant portion:
For those who can't listen to clips online, here's a transcript what Romney said during his June 6 conference call with the far-right National Federation of Independent Business:
"I hope you make it very clear to your employees what you believe is in the best interest of your enterprise and therefore their job and their future in the upcoming elections. And whether you agree with me or you agree with President Obama, or whatever your political view, I hope, you pass those along to your employees. There's nothing illegal about you talking to your employees about what you believe is best for the business, because I think that will figure into their election decision, their voting decision."
We know, of course, that plenty of Romney allies have taken the advice to heart, including David Siegel, the CEO of a large timeshare company, who sent a lengthy written tirade to his workers, telling them President Obama's re-election would "threaten your job." There have been similar incidents involving Arthur Allen, CEO of ASG Software Solutions; Bob Murray, CEO of coal company Murray Energy; Richard Lacks, CEO of Lacks Enterprises; and of course, the Koch brothers.
As for whether Romney's correct about the legality, this isn't my area of expertise, but The Atlantic's Adam Clark Estes wrote, "It's not technically illegal for employers to tell their employees how to vote. That doesn't mean that it's ethical or understandable or even acceptable to connect people's livelihoods with their political beliefs. There's a fine line between an employer telling an employee, 'Vote Romney!' and a boss telling a subordinate, 'Vote Romney, or else!' At least, in the eyes of the inevitably subordinate employees there's not."
Leave a Comment:
Romney will always be the candidate of the rich.Mitt Romney, Paul Ryan and the Republican Party have habitually acquiesced to the orders of their only true masters, the rich and privileged elite. elected by taxpayers and ordinary Americans, our lawmakers in Washington increasingly have no connection and no accountability to real voters. Why else would they so brazenly discard the overwhelming support of the people for a means to make the super-rich pay their fair share and stubbornly block a law based on the common sense that billionaires shouldn;t pay fewer taxes than teachers or secretaries? - progressive
Yet more evidence Romney and his crowd have been waging class warfare for some time now!
There was a time when such sentiment needed to at least have viable cover or deniability. Man, these oligarchical patricians have been so rapt in Rightwing media loops, so emblazoned by their Tea Party Posse of low-information voters, so enveloped in self-importance, they arrogantly think they can operate out in the wide open for everyone to see!
Well, behind closed doors - but really, living in an age of instant recordings and media access what door is really closed to the outside world when such offensive things are said? -Kevo
What really is on display is Romney's utter contempt for WE the PEOPLE! His whole "patrician demeanor", the rudeness that has been on display when he is challenged, the hubris, the "just trust me" cause I'm rich and I know what's best for you - all point to exactly why he spoke so easily and disdainfully about the 47%!
Romney, Ryan, the Koch brothers, and the rest have shown exactly what they think about working Americans. They have become insulted from life and reality both because they have money and because Americans have been seduced into believing that "money & celebrity" are to be worshiped by US mere minions! It's why being photographed with unpaid coal miners, or "volunteering to wash clean dishes", and just flat-out lying come so easily to them! The sad part is that the low information, high on religuluoun voters haven't realized how badly they are being used to vote against their own economic best interests and if Romney does get the Presidency and the GOTP start dismantling the last of the safety net these are the people that will explode first!
There oughta be a law...
There is, it's the Civil rights act of 1965 , in which it is made very clear that harrassment in the workplace is against the law. the workplace is not the arena for someone to use as a "bully pulpit". Thank God that voting is still private. What they have actually succeeded in doing is to anger those who know that their vote is sacred to them and it is no busineess of anyone, not even their employer. Some of us answer to a higher authority. Sorry Romney.
Those days of wine and roses , gone but not forgotten . When armed militias roamed the southern states to begin a correction to the problem of constituencies voting their conscience . In short order an entire process of regulation to purify the vote . With a little of the entirely understandable decisions to coerce erstwhile "dependents" into a "correction" of those little worries that don't quite fit , or satisfy , an employers needs and wants .
Isn't it wonderful that Herr Romney has come out four square for those underrepresented business interests who suffer inordinate opprobrium for their singular focus on themselves . Those unwashed dirty hippies are to blame for all the ills in the world , not the strip mining , gun manufacturers , et al who blamelessly take what they can , like any red blooded alpha male would .
Careful you are sailing precariously close to Godwin's law and that will turn this discussion from serious to satire in the blink of an eye
Voter intimidation is a federal crime. Romney's comment may not cross that line, but some of the employers who have threatened their employees may have. I worry that some employers will next try to require their employees to request absentee ballots and vote in their employer's presence.
I refuse to be bullied in the voting booth. Deal with it, CEO's from hell.
If Democrats were doing half of the nonsense these guys are pulling trying to steal an election, there would be rioting in the streets.
Please. What Romney is doing is nothing compared to unions forcibly taking people's money and using it to fund Democrats. Grow up.
I almost agree with you shooter. Unions do advocate politically. The difference is that Unions don't generally hold the power of employment over peoples heads, Bosses/CEOs do.
That's a pretty big difference when you're using a position of power to 'encourage' people to do what you want.
This is the sort of thinking you get from a dumba$$ like Airball.
One other thing to think about shooter. If a union decided to actively push employees into voting against their conscience their are avenues that those people can use to complain and even take legal action. Against CEOs its a lot more problematic.
What you are essentially making the case for here is "Might makes Right" and we don't do that in this country. To say that "The other side does it" is a fallacious and flawed argument
It's Shooter who needs to grow up. I'm not happy that both AT&T and Verizon for example are big Republican donors, but I need a cell phone. And I guess you're ok with Citizens United destroying our democracy because at this moment, it's benefits the fascists you prefer. If you dolts get your way and destroy unions, we'll all be working for $7 an hour (until the wingnuts repeal minimum wage) with no benefits while the Romney's, Koch's and Adelson's of the world continue to collect OUR money and laugh their ass off at us serfs.
You're wasting your time, folks. That dickweed is impervious to decency, common sense, and logic. If you can't find something bad to say about Airball, you've simply missed an opportunity to say something positive to the world. Arguing to convince is futile. That mind is closed.
Shooter is wrong. Unions to not have the power to tell you to vote one way or else you don't have a job. This is the very reasons why unions are important.
My union receives money from me with full disclosure and with my 'ok'; has supported political candidates I trust in my district (sometimes democrats, sometimes republicans); has provided education and vital information about my rights, and continues to assist me when I need clarification and how to navigate the relationship between teachers and administration.
I'm not convinced that unions are just a mechanism to fill the democrat's coffers. It's my belief, without a union to buffer the space between staff and administration, the scale would be tipped unfairly to the folks not in the class room.
When any employee lacks equal ability/resources to negotiate, defend and legally represent the odds are against them operating on a fair and balanced field.
I started my working history in eighth grade, been a dive tender, dishwasher, greens keeper, carpenter, business owner and now I teach special education at the primary level. I'm the majority bread winner for my family; care take a disabled mother in-law, a father -in-law with dementia and a brother in law- with a low IQ and diagnosed as Autistic. All my choices, all my lot and...
When I need support on the job, someone to look out for mine and my peers best interest- our union is there for us. I appreciate someone caring for me.
It's comforting, in a time when fifteen minutes of tv time will feed us so much worry and talk of unraveling... comfort alone may be is worth the dues.
Blanks is here spouting his nonsense again. No, it's not like unions at all. More like the boss seducing the girl in the mail room. Even if she is of age and willing, it is taking advantage of her because of the power he holds. It may not be illegal, but it's sleazy as hell. Just one more reminder of who Rmoney really is.
Why are you wasting your time?
This proves how Romney will govern as a boss - ignoring democracy and our Constitution. The Republicans do not care because they want a government run by a Republican Regime, control of all three branches of our government, silencing the voices of people who hold different ideologies. Our Democracy is slipping away every day - first the Board of Directors (SCOTUS) sold us out with Citizens United, than Voter Suppression, voting machine company tied to Mitt Romney and Bain Capital, Koch Brothers, David Siegel CEO of Westgate Resort and Arthur Allen CEO of ASG Software Solutions intimidating their employees with their livelihood and now Romney suggesting that CEO's continue to this action. Romney was a Bully in High School and this statement proves he is still a BULLY.
Back to Valerie23's original offering, if Pres. Obama had done anything even close to this the right would be off the charts screaming about how this president is once again trying to take away your freedom and now he wants to take your most critical freedom. And you could be sure that every single mainstream media outlet would be asking hard questions about this for weeks on end. So much for a liberal media bias. I thought Republicans were for freedom but I guess I must've missed the fine print where it says this doesn't apply to the voter booth. Republicans don't want government interference in private industry unless it's them doing it.
I'm surprised The Blank didn't spout the standard Looneytarian line about how business owners supposedly have "the right to run their businesses as they see fit." Now that, folks, is a classic example of an invented right.
In the meantime, "Ayn Rand and the Sociopathic Society":
http://www.democraticunderground.com/100292376
We don't want no regulation
We don't need no cost control
Job creators need our tax breaks
Workers, leave your hopes at home
Most states make it illegal tp BUY votes! An employer is using the power of a paycheck to buy an employee's vote. Toss them in jail and leave them there.
Coercive pressure applied by employers against employees
Not illegal, but wrong - As if that matters to the Right.
Kind of stupid also. I mean the first reaction to such a threat is to fight back and since the voting booth is still private any employee that cares about his own freedom would of course vote against the person his boss said to vote for.
Why wouldn't Romney tell business leaders to tell their "underlings" how to vote? In Romney's mind, this is just what Bosses do!!
This fits so well into Romney's "meme" as "boss", aka "dictator".
The last debate was the true Romney in all his glory. HE thought HE was in charge of what happened at that debate just because he showed up!! I could see on his face how upset he was when Candy and Obama didn't follow his orders!! How DARE they!!!! Especially Candy, a WOMAN! And a woman who "didn't know her place'!!
In his world, BOSSES make all the decisions and have all the authority and have the responsibility to see to it that all "underlings" do exactly what they are told to do! Underlings are there ONLY to be syncophants - if they don't like it, they can go somewhere else. He did that in his "businesses", he tried to do that as Governor, and he does that in his church! You do as Romney says or else!!
So where are all of us who choose not to vote as we are told going to go if Romney gets elected? Because we won't be welcome in Romney's world!!
Democracy? What Democracy? That concept doesn't even exist in Romney's mind! His idea of "BOSS" is as close to dictatorship as I've ever seen in US politics!
I am betting he can't even fathom what the Preamble to the Constitution means!!
Democracy has been supplanted by lunacy on the Right. And, at the debate, Romney being Romney was rude, disrespectful and entitled. He was so rude to the President, that at points, you just wanted to throttle him. He cares about nobody but himself and his thoughts and feelings. It was probably just another executive memo he sent when he said pressure citizens to vote Romney, or else you will starve, fail, go bankrupt - the threat isn't even implicit.. I pray it has the opposite effect. In any case, the people's voice - the 47%, the 30%, those people, the Help -- basically all of us who are NOT the filthy rich will be heard. Just remember to transfer all this anger and outrage into your ONE SINGLE VOTE, and take this extremely dangerous man down. At this point, it's not so much whether you agree with everything Obama says or not. It's more about whether you want some rich dictator to run your life and take your liberty for the next four years.
Remember, individually, our vote one drop in the sea, but together we are an ocean. So, get angry, get busy and VOTE! And, drag your neighbor with you to the voting place.
Beware of an used car salesman with a sketchy financial deal. They'll say anything to try sell you a lemon. I've being there and seen that, and I definitely won't want to go back. Having a short memory span is very dangerous. One single part do not change the machinery. If it is working, why try to fix it? Especially by replacing it with the same machinery that just almost send us all to an abyss. I am just saying... be smart and don't fall for the shiny object. Use common sense America.
As I've said before - Mitt Romney, the man who would have us elect him king! -Kevo
"With his well-built frame and stark aquiline nose, brooding eyes, and resolute air, he lacked humility for a common-born man, convinced, as usually only nobles are, of his intrinsic worth."
Fictional Isabella of Spain describing Columbus. Sound like anyone else?
C.W. Gortner, The Queen's Vow
Let's see; stock markets are at an all time high, corporate profits are thru the roof, and yet the Plutocrats are telling their serfs that Armageddon is nigh, vote as if your paycheck depends upon it.
Does. Not. Compute.
Actually, it does make sense. Get rid of regulations and growth limits and the chimps become humans - they rule the world, define morality, domesticate some animals while eliminating the habitat of others. Who says Republicans don't believe in evolution?
You are both right ....The new republican party , striving for a permanent underclass who will scrabble for existence wages.
They are very happy when unemployment is high, but they put up the Big Lie ...Oh we are VERY concerned about unemployment , which is why we vote against extending unemployment benefits, to put you in that fight for existence wages sooner
No it doesn't compute, Day but they believe that Obama will crack down on them in a second term. They want no regulations, "drill baby drill" don't build cars that don't need our oil, or electricity that runs on coal with no new technology has polluted the air even more, just keep on doing what always been done to make us rich. Rape the planet even more than has already been done and when California, and New York, and both coasts become a series of islands then maybe we should take a look at our energy policies. Why does America keep believing their lies? Because the Plutocrats know how to use scare tactics about change to keep us in line.
Not surprising.
$HERSELF commented that Romney's voice and demeanor when talking to the public changes from when he's with "his kind." His voice is higher, with tighter vocal control, and he adopts that fixed grin. It took me a while to put my finger on it, but then I recognized it as the manner of someone who's not comfortable with children talking to a kindergarten class. In other words, he's forcing himself to talk down to his inferiors (who aren't capable of understanding more.)
So it's not at all surprising that he'd expect the adults (AKA "Job Creators") to direct the Little People working for them in how to vote. After all, it's not like they are capable of taking responsibility for their own lives, how can they handle the heavy responsibility of picking the right people (i.e. Romney) to be their teacher?
As the grandmother of two girls, I fear what their future will be if Romney is elected. The debate this week showed me an overbearing, ruthless bully. Perhaps the victim of Mitt's bullying in high school could tell us more about Mitt's character than anyone else. He will owe a tremendous debt to a small group of very wealthy white men if he is elected. What he does about that, if elected, is scary.
I wish he could too, but he is dead.
For the party that insists they hold the moral high ground on social issues, they seem to have a distinct problem with business ethics
They seem to regard the two things as mutually exclusive
This is an interesting topic. And while there certainly is an ethical line involved, least of which is not that there is a power/authority differential between boss and employee. Here's a couple of thoughts to consider.
1. A major issue in this election is jobs. What is good for business and what is not. This directly relates to people getting or keeping their job. Why is it okay on a large scale but not a small scale?
2. No one but the voter knows how he/she casts their ballot, so the ability for any retribution seems minimal. But, there definitely are free speech issues involved - that is the employee being able to voice their vote or outwardly support an opposing candidate to the boss.
3. There is also some parallels between this and unions. If unions can voice their political choice, shouldn't management be able to do the same? Lots of pros and cons here, I'm sure.
4. Lastly, it is always wrong to threaten or coerce someone...period. While genuinely informing workers what will help the business and what will hurt the business in which they are invested is a good thing, this issue is not just that simple.
Point 2 is a good one. In a world where it is "impolite" or improper to talk about politics, those who create their alternate reality win. Getting along with others requires discussion, tolerance and conflict resolution skills. Not that Republicans favor getting along - that's too much like socialization, but still.
RobDon,
I agree with you on Points 2, 3, and 4, but I take issue with Point 1. Businesses have every right to pour money into campaigns so that the general populace hears their views. But it is VERY DIFFERENT when a person is being "coerced" at their workplace. Bosses tend to have a great deal of "power" over their employees at the workplace - there is no semblance of Democracy there!! And my boss has no qualms about trying to assert his "lack of Democracy" into my private - nonwork- spaces and trying to control what I do in non-work hours also!
Right now I am getting spammed with emails telling me how "I'd better vote" or else! I don't have the right to refute these emails or get my views across because I am not "the BOSS"! Isn't politics supposed to be about everyone getting their views heard? How is this fair or how does this fit into the concept of "Democracy"?
It's not a free speech issue. "Free" speech is concerned only with the government proscribing speech.
It's a decency issue. And Republicans, especially Mitt Romney, is an indecent man.
And businesses don't have some "right" to flood campaigns with their political preferences. The present situation could be changed if there were an intelligent electorate. We don't have an intelligent electorate. We live in Idiot America.
Wasn't that "right" given to them by Citizens United?? So for now (but hopefully not in the future) they have the right to give as much money as they want to SuperPacs and flood the country with their point of view!
No, it is a "free speech" issue. This is about governmental process - the process of electing national representatives - and "free speech" DOES apply to that process! However, you "give up" the right of free speech when you take a job!
Couldn't agree with you more!!!
As far as threats go, it's all empty, but it takes some kind of character to do something as indecent as this. If this were playing out in a movie, wouldn't we all agree who the bad guy is? This is despicable and it shows a glimpse of a person's character. What I don't understand is how the Republican base considers this acceptable behavior. What is it about Republican politics that makes its followers so willing to resort to filth just so they can get what they want? If this were true about the Democrats, then we would've elected Hilary Clinton to run for president during the 2008 primaries. I supported Sen. Clinton that year--staunchly, but the moment she hurled those awful pies: the birthirism in particular, I was disgusted. I didn't know Barack Obama then. I didn't know exactly what he was standing up for, but I knew that I could not support someone who would resort to such terrible smear tactics to win a nomination. It seems many of the Democrats felt the same.
Incidentally, I don't quite agree that Unions and CEOs have the same effect. Unions don't pay a person's wages. Unions don't give people their jobs. Bosses have that power, and when your boss tells you to vote for someone or else, you can't just tell them to f-off.
What would happen to an employee of one of those companies if that employee were to publicly supported Obama, was seen at an Obama rally, was caught handing out Obama campaign materials?
My sister works at one such company and supports Obama. But she has to be careful who she speaks with, what she "likes" on facebook, cannot contribute (at least in her own name) to the Obama campaign and certainly cannot show her support publicly.
There is something wrong with that.
No, it's not a right. It can be taken away. And it should. Corporations are not people, my friend.
No, its not a free speech issue. No body is keeping the employee from speaking.
RobDon, you state,
"1. A major issue in this election is jobs. What is good for business and what is not. This directly relates to people getting or keeping their job. Why is it okay on a large scale but not a small scale?"
-- Then the business leaders should tell their employees the facts. Since 1977 jobs created:
Democratic presidents: 32,500,000.
Republican presidents: 18,097,000.
Only 1 Republican president since 1977 has improved the unemployment rate over their term(s)--Reagan. ALL Democratic presidents have improved the unemployment rate over their term(s).
"4. Lastly, it is always wrong to threaten or coerce someone...period. While genuinely informing workers what will help the business and what will hurt the business in which they are invested is a good thing, this issue is not just that simple."
-- Again, business booms under Democratic presidents, not Republican presidents. Since 1977:
- GDP higher under Democratic presidents.
- National debt as a percentage of GDP: better under Dems.
- National debt added:
Republicans: $9.5 trillion.
Democrats: $5.8 trillion.
It's simply a lie that business is better under Republican presidents. What does occur under Republican presidents:
- less restrictions on pollution.
- less taxes on the rich. (Top tax was 70% under JFK)
- less restrictions on business (not good from a societal standpoint.)
The simple fact that these business leaders are so prominently making their political stance known is these are the tactics an oppressive regime needs to take in order to win:
1. Bosses threatening employees' jobs.
2. Trying to set unequal voting times in Ohio.
3. Trying to implement voter ID.
4. Trying to end early voting in Penn.
5. Trying to remove Obama from the ballot in Kansas.
Any Republicans who consider themselves decent citizens, should be appalled by these actions occurring in America. I'd be embarrassed to even tell anyone I was Republican under these circumstances. The first Republican president, Abraham Lincoln, would be ashamed.
I think something should tell these employers, that Americans are behind the workers' decision to vote as they please. If they get away with this, being paid $2.00 an hour is just around the corner. They've already taken away mostly all of our benefits, so once in a while we have to take a stand. Let's send the bosses packing this time, let them stand on the un-employment line for a change. Somebody will build a better place to work where the employees are treated with dignity. Let's all work at that place.
that will only happen if we re elect President Obama and get the house back in 2014. Obama Biden 2012 then let's get the House back!
needs to go viral
I believe that the ruthlessness and the callousness with which Mitt Romney conducts himself goes very deep. The disrespect and the dishonor he shows when talking about or dealing with those he feels are beneath him is obvious. Case in point: Mitt Romney's son was interviewed yesterday via radio and he was asked how he felt during the debate (when his father's clock was getting cleaned by President Obama) and mitt romney's son's response was “Jump out of your seat and you want to rush down to the stage and take a swing at him. But you know you can't do that because, well, first because there's a lot of Secret Service between you and him, but also because that's the nature of the process."
Is that the country we have become? Where is Mitt Romney on this? Why has he not apologized to POTUS and to us for his son's disrespect? Where is Tagg Romney? Where is his apology to POTUS for threatening violence?
The Romney's have proven that they live by a different set of standards and different set of laws. Was it a regular person who threatened violence against the President of the United States, that person would not go unnoticed!
It's sad to think that is how some children are being raised. Violence is never the right answer. I thought that Romney was teaching our youth a horrible lesson in rudeness. I don't care who you are, or even if you think you are a God, he had no right talking down to The President of the United States of America. He has no right talking down to the citizens either. The choice is simple, do we want a President or do we want a Boss?
Can you imagine the result if the two sides would have been reversed? What if Michelle Obama or one of the Obama kids had said something like that?
The answer to your question is yes, this is the country we have become. When the greatest threat to the world can't be mentioned in the race for the President of the United States because over half of our citizens are stupid enough to believe the writings of non-scientists in business papers, wingnut TV, blogs, and fake think tanks over climate scientists, then we've essentially become a country that can not and will not solve the problems that face us except to the satisfaction on those self-interested mediocrities like Mitt Romney and his even less substantive partner Paul Ryan.
Sorry Disgusted, but that's the second greatest threat. The greatest threat would be republican control of the U.S. government should romney win and they retain control of the house. The safety net will be destroyed along with medicare and social security. The Supreme Court will swing to the right and the world will have to deal with the warmongering neocons.
Well, Republicans taking over would just ensure that the greatest threat would come to pass. In the scheme of things, the destruction of the Earth -- with full knowledge it's going to happen -- is the greatest threat. The language doesn't matter here, though which we label the greatest threat. Republicans taking over will ensure both disasters take place. One disaster destroys the nation, the other, the world. Perhaps Idiot America deserves its fate; we've destroyed ourselves with our superficiality, selfishness, and determined, willful inability to grow up as a nation. But the rest of the world doesn't deserve the attendant results of our irresponsible actions.
How much is enough is a very different question for a multimillionaire and a family trying to keep their child from going to bed hungry. Romney and his ilk do not consider the family in their quest to own the world, unless of course, it is their family. I would suggest a 10 yr surtax on all income, earned and unearned, 'capped at the level that would change your lifestyle.' For Mitt his entire income payed as tax would not remove one caviar egg from his table. If multimillionaires spent their income, each year that would help the economy. Stashing it off-shore is pure greed. Thus this is an easy choice, spend it or pay it in taxes.
Thank you . What a wonderful meme "Stashing it off-shore is pure greed."
Who among us would opt not to take a deduction so that the "appearance" of paying enough tax is generated
and he can still do all that after buying an elevator for his cars.
Unconscionable
Some while back, I was convinced the Democrats simply weren't doing enough to inoculate themselves against the obvious false lines of attack that anybody with an IQ over 50 and know Republicans for the scum they are knew was coming (deficits, debt, obstruction, ..., things they're responsible for but for which they'll charge against Democrats). I always concluded that Democrats would play it so timid that, by the end, they wouldn't know what hit them and it would be too late to combat it.
But for all the gods man has ever created, there's no way you can predict the slime these indecent people can and will come up with.
That's why you always have to be engaged with this threat to a decent society. They never quit. Never. They play the long game. They have no decency. And people need to understand it is not a debating contest; it is a war. Letting your guard down is not an option.
The Republicans have been good at villianizing "lamestream" media, and calling it "liberal bias" and people who are less informed believe it.
Blackmailing people to influence the vote should be illegal on its own. Without a direct threat it is still conspiracy to unduly (pressure) influence a persons vote. Conspiracy in many cases carries the same penalty as the actual crime.
Is voting still private?
This year, when I voted in the primaries in AL, the Civics Center was partitioned, the Republicans went down one line and the Democrats went down another line, where we were checked off out of, I assume, the same book on both sides. If I remember correctly, last year it was broken out by alphabet.
I stood in the blue line and looked at all the faces in the red line staring over at us. It didn't feel private at all.
What sort of banana republic and corporate-ruled thugocracy has America become when political candidates can get away with urging employers to tell their worthless and mindless workers how to vote? The right to vote is sacred and guaranteed to everyone. No business owner, no matter how rich or how many "jobs" they have "created," has a say in how citizens can or should vote. Romney is treading dangerous territory with these comments. If Mitt thinks it's perfectly legitimate to coerece the votes of employees, what else does this man think is acceptable behavior from our leaders? What sort of tricks would he have up his sleeve if elected president? This is truly dangerous. - PP
Romney reminds me of Nixon, or" tricky Dick" as we called him in those days. He even has his beady eyes and jerky ways. His campaign is full of lies, math that doesn't compute, and an astounding arrogance that allows him to disrespect the President, or the moderators of debates. He is the mean "boss" that America will come to hate if he is elected.
How True !!! TRICKY MITTY !!!
The arrogance the other night was outrageous !!! But with most of the Republicans, there is no respect for the man or his position.Whether you agree with him or not, he is THE President of this country,voted in by the people of this country. I was half waiting to see if he was ugly enough to tell him to sit down "boy". His son wanted to take a swing at the President ? Please...I'm in NH...you can tell when the Romneys are here....there's an arrogance in the air....and it stinks !!!!
Why is this not voter intimidation? It's putting pressure on workers to vote a certian way, that is the meaning of voter intimidation. Call it what it is and charge them.
I wanted to listen to this, but listening to Romney makes me sick. Romney was born and raised in a church that relegates its women to a secondary position. He has a patriarchal mind set and that stuff is scary. I know. I was in that church and experienced it. If you become a successful woman, they will find a way to marginalize you. If you need help, they will put conditions on that help. The LDS church is secretive, and demeaning to women. I have a real problem with men who have no sense of equality. If there is not equality between the sexes, there certainly will be no equality between anyone else, unless you are a white male. If he is elected, I will be loudly saying "I told you so!"
This is voter intimidation; they are putting pressure on voters to vote a certain way, classic intimidation.
Does this really come as any surprise? Churches are now jumping into the fray hinting at how their members should be voting!